CALIFORNIAN V. NEW ZEALAND DRIED APPLES.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 13454, 3 June 1907, Page 8

CALIFORNIAN V. NEW ZEALAND DRIED APPLES.

, Sir,— remark ' reported in a late issue , as from Mr. Boucher, Government pomo- ; logist, . calls for some notice. ■." That gentle- ' man, who is now; returned from California, j tells us that New Zealand cannot success- . fully compete with California in the pro- , duction of dried apples on account of cli- | matic differences. It may be that the les- . son taught some of us when behind the counter as to the difference between "dried" (outdoor sun) and "evaporated" (machine died) has not now beer? noticed by Mr. Boucher. Some few yoars ago, when there was a prospect of starting a factory in this ! (Bay of Islands) county, I visited my old friend (since deceased), Mr. W. Webster, in his home, on the Hokianga Harbour. I was shown all the appliances so successfully worked in producing evaporated apples, at that time fully admitted to be one penny or three half-pence per lb superior in value to the imported article. I drew the plans ' and submitted them to the Government De- ! partment, and they were ; approved of. r Want of quantity of fruit here, and want » of population prevented the development " of the enterprise, hut there was no appre--3 hension as to not being able to produce a c very superior article Everyone who has • cut an apple knows that immediately the 1 flesh is exposed discolouration —decomposi- : tion—sets .in. It must be a very bright, 1 sunny day, with a very dry atmosphere, to " arrest this change before it is serious. With the indoor evaporating process the sliced • rings are at once placed in the sulphur • chamber, and so the bright colour and fine ' flavour preserved, the expense of fuel be- • ing compensated by safety and certainty in ' manipulation. "At a time when efforts are being made to attract the attention of the ' outside world to the capabilities of this, at ' present undeveloped, and little understood ' Far North, it is disheartening to be getting J a set-back from one who should be doing his best to help, especially when the true ■ way of putting the case would tell in the right direction. The evaporating plant, ' as worked by Mr. Webster, is by no means 5 expensive. With that at work, we are at once on equal footing with California in r the matter of getting rid of the superfluous ' moisture, and we have the advantage of quality of fruit. The appliances, too, avail- " able for other fruits and vegetables. One 5 great argument in favour of this process of ' preserving is its adaptability to remote dis- ' triets. No tins, no sugar, and very great decrease of weight to be handled in tran- ' sit, rather than increase. Jonx Press.